Template:Did you know nominations/Kamban Kazhagam


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:00, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Kamban Kazhagam

 * ... that Saw Ganesan founded the Kamban Kazhagam to promote Kambar's Ramayana? Source: The Hindu
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/He Siyuan

Created/expanded by Gfosankar (talk). Self-nominated at 13:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC).


 * Symbol possible vote.svg The article needs extensive copy-editing - I can not understand some sentences. Ruslik_ Zero 17:23, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Gfosankar, it is important for you to post to the nomination page when you have addressed the issues; it looks like you have done some copyediting, and that should have been mentioned here. Ruslik0, please let us know whether you think the changes are sufficient, If not, then I recommend that Gforsankar make a request for a copyedit at WP:GOCE/REQ, since articles must be completely understandable to run on the main page. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:18, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg It was slightly better after the copy-editing by the author although I finished copy-editing myself. So, now it is ready. Ruslik_ Zero 20:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Ruslik0, have you also checked the other DYK criteria, such as length, newness, neutrality, adequate citations (including of the hook facts), close paraphrasing/copyvio, and so on? Please be sure always to specify what you've checked in your review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The article length is 1934 characters, it is new for Wikipedia, neutral, the hook fact is adequately cited. Copyvio is unlikely taking into account the low initial quality of the prose - it is more likely that it is an original work. Ruslik_ Zero 12:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ruslik0. I've removed the "?" icon I placed at the front of my previous comment so this can proceed with your approval. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:06, 6 February 2018 (UTC)